41
comments:

He says we can't see e-volution happening because we don't live long enough. But we DO see it happening. The ongoing evoluiton of bacteria to be resistant to the antibiotics we throw at them IS continual random mutation followed by selection by the antibiotics of those fit enough to survive them and repoduce into a population great enough to infect hosts. We have seen this happen in lifetimes and it is happening faster and faster, because the bacteria that mutate most are also the ones being selected for by our ability to rapidly develop anti-biotics.

What we see is what we already know...MICRO-evolution occurs...that's pretty simple to understand and that's ALL Dawkins mentions in this little video segment...we say so what? Tell us what we don't know...At either rate he has NO EVIDENCE of cross-speciation which is what would have to happen IF evolution were true.

He says that everything including the migration of animals is "exactly what we'd expect if evolution were true"...I suppose this is the argument of transmigrational patterns right? Is evolution the ONLY answer for that? I mean we live in outer space long enough and they tell me that our legs will atrophy form lack of use..Would the difference in humans who live in outer space who'e legs are atrophied and humans who live on earth who have the use of their legs be due to evolution under that hypothetical? To argue such is a ridiculous notion. Is it evolution or is it some sort of microadaptation to the needs of the environment? Once again it certain WOULDN'T be cross-speciation that evolution must hold if it were true.

I was glad to see this atheist at least acknowledge one thing...that FACTS can come from what isn't seen or observed...I mean atheists say they didn't "see" the resurrection so the evidence means nothing...If we are to follow that same pattern, this man acknowledges that we don't SEE evolution but it remains a fact...WELL go figure...evolutionary faith statements!!!

If the evolutionary theory were completely accurate, all weak or vulnerable organisms/beings would eventually be eliminated. But vulnerabilities continue to be revealed throughout time in all organisms/beings even though they seemingly "survive" the threat to their existence for a period of time. Even cockroaches eventually die. :-)

I have a question for you. Did you study biology? Genetics? Chemistry? Anything that allows you to speak with authority aboout this subject?

Dawkins is an expert on the subject and you are not. Additionally, he doesn't hold a position where he can't produce evidence for his theories. You do. Your paycheck causes me to distrust your perspective.

But it isn't! and besides... Dawkins has to stop contradicting himself... Evolution is a well elaborated science fiction! I am not - at least now - saying anything religious as the origin but evolution is a joke... even if we make up pieces of the puzzle nobody know how it came about (despite trying) or where did the condensed particle of energy came from??? If our universe expand and collapse endlessly then there is not really time and if so... Then there is no now! or if that what triggers it - evolution cannot explain - nice science fiction story and that is all - star trek - wake up

Stupid goprairies - there is no evolution in bacteria becoming resistant but a mere adaptation to a ever growing harsh environment (for the bacteria) it adapts ! It does not become another species... still there is no evolution...

You asked:"Did you study biology? Genetics? Chemistry? Anything that allows you to speak with authority aboout this subject?"

So that's how it's done now? novices can't read critically and assess information with other available information? Well YOU should scrap and biblical critiques if that's the case...how are you qualified to assess any biblical evidences...you see it's a circular argument and one that is self refuting...I need no special scientific qualifications, only good information, which i have.

You assert:Additionally, he doesn't hold a position where he can't produce evidence for his theories.

Neither do I. The problem is that metaphysical naturalists only evaluate information with a naturalist presuppositional bias.

You said:Your paycheck causes me to distrust your perspective.

I understand what you're saying here but I only want to illustrate that all boats don't float the same...I work for a Sunday afternoon dinner, where the church feeds me, my wife and 2 kids. no "paycheck" so to speak. I have secular employment for that...

Now let's contrast this for a minute...do you think Dawkins, has EVER worked for anything(on this subject) where self-promotion and his 'paycheck" wasn't the object? I don't know him but I'd scarcely belive that self-promotion hasn't been the reason he promotes this foolishness the way he does...that's right, I call it foolishness because much of what he says has already been refuted by better science.

So sorry Churck O, none of what you bring up remotely deals with the issue...where is the cross-speciation and macro-evolution necessary to cofirm this "theory"...IT doesn't exist...it's only in the mind of them that wich to believe...BOY doesn't that sound a lot like what atheists say of Christians???-LOL!!!

District: At either rate he has NO EVIDENCE of cross-speciation which is what would have to happen IF evolution were true.

How do you know there is no evidence as you have NOT read anything beyond creationism and IDism. I have suggested numerous times to creationists like you to avail yourself of the literature presenting the evidence for evolution such as Darrel Falk (writing from a Christian perspective) or Jerry Coyne, or even Dawkins's new book. But no, you refuse.

Is it evolution or is it some sort of microadaptation to the needs of the environment?

Adaptation is one of the driving forces of evolution. It's not evolution or adaptation, once again you show your ignorance.

this man acknowledges that we don't SEE evolution but it remains a fact...WELL go figure...evolutionary faith statements!!!

So, should we now throw out forensic science because there were no eye witnesses?

novices can't read critically and assess information with other available information?

You misunderstand Chuck's point. There is nothing wrong with someone who is not an expert in a specific field to still attempt to critically assess viewpoints. In this particular instance Harvey, you have shown that you have NOT critically assessed the evidence for evolution so your criticisms are bunk.

that's right, I call it foolishness because much of what he [Dawkins] says has already been refuted by better science.

Better science? You mean creationism and intelligent design? None of these people are doing any real science my friend, this is simply rhetoric.

where is the cross-speciation and macro-evolution necessary to cofirm this "theory"...IT doesn't exist...

Sir, you are speaking out of your ass! You cannot ask for information when you have been directed to that evidence over and over again. You simply refuse to read it. Stop pretending that you are objective.

Beautiful Feet: If the evolutionary theory were completely accurate, all weak or vulnerable organisms/beings would eventually be eliminated.

Sorry, but this is a misinterpretation of evolution. Please do some reading on the topic to educate yourself. See this link and scroll about half way down to see some of the literature on evolution that I reference there.

Evangelico: Evolution is a well elaborated science fiction!... evolution is a joke...

Why do you say this? Have you read up on the topic? I hear these types of statements from creationists and IDists all the time, but most do not have the slightest idea of what evolution is. I know, I used to be a creationist and made many similar statements until I educated myself on the topic and discovered that the evidence of evolution is overwhelming.

there is no evolution in bacteria becoming resistant but a mere adaptation to a ever growing harsh environment (for the bacteria) it adapts ! It does not become another species... still there is no evolution...

Again, please educate yourself before making a lot of statements that demonstrate your ignorance of the topic. The evidence of bacteria becoming resistance is evidence for evolution! Adaptation is one of the driving forces of evolution, it is what leads (at least in part) to speciation.

Read Dawkins's new book or Jerry Coyne's "Why Evolution is True" to see some of this evidence.

You're the one speaking out of your posterior...as I said there is NO SUCH THING as MICRO-evolution as the kind which is necessary for evolution by natural selection to be possible...The fossil record affirms as much as there is no cross-speciation fossil record whether by any process you name...I learned the GARBAGE you believe in high school and college science and it's unsupportable.

You have no credibility with me either and until you can prove your generic fantasy you're simply blowing smoke pretending that what you believe by your NATURALISTIC FAITH is word and IT'S NOT!

There are so many process that have to occur before evolution can do anything and the arguments against this mess is like 300 lb. college athlete at a buffet...so much to choos which eviolution doesn't come close to overcoming...

I'm borrowing from the movie "Oh, Brother Where Art Thou" when I say you're as dumb as a bag of hammers. Ignorant and useless assertions about micro/macro distinctions are irrelevant. I have little tolerance for the specialty brand of stupid sold by your version of Christianity. Denying science is also contrary to most of the rest of Christianity, and it does neither you nor those congregations subjected to your self-serving preachments any good.

It saddens me that from the pulpit you denigrate and lie about precisely the same science that you, your fellow churchmen, as well as the rest of us, live on. The science that gives you modern agriculture, also gives you evolutionary theory. The science that gives you in vitro fertilization, neonatal care, and the rest of contemporary medical science, also gives you evolutionary theory. The science that gives you computing systems, also gives you evolutionary theory. The science that prints your silly Bible, also gives you evolutionary theory. Fact is, the science that allows us to cross-check and fact check the claims of Christians to see how woefully wanting they are, also gives us evolutionary theory. Denying these things shines a spotlight on your profound ignorance in these matters. You really should stick to what you know, the dogmatic particulars of your version of Christianity. You should stay in your pulpit where your mindless minions freely let you have your way with them.

You told Chuck that when you preach, you basically work for food. But, in other comments here you've told us that you still make your income taking money from your fellow Christians by giving them financial advise and selling them insurance. I'm sure that your financial services clients came through the Wall Street meltdown unscathed, since you have a Christian god on your side. However, I'm surprised that morally you would sell them financial instruments that won't pay off until after the fast-approaching Armageddon. Also, the actuarial science - itself a study of ever-changing populations - you lean on to sell insurance contributes to evolutionary theory.

It is most fortunate for you that there are plenty of ignorant people who will never look at and never see the wonder of evolutionary theory due solely to the lies, misinformation, and misrepresentations of it you, through the authority they give you, force on them. For the rest of us, including the Christianities that accept the established science of evolutionary theory(that's most of them), it is a complete waste of human potential.

You pervert those people's minds to the point where they are less capable of understanding and interpreting the world around them when you pervert the science we all are completely dependent on to survive. Remember, Harvey, they can live without you, they cannot live in today's world without science, and understanding it would make their lives so much better.

Evidence for evolution abounds. Physical observable evidence like fossils that follow progressions in time. Physical evidence like similar species in similar habitats and niches of those habitats and variations that are preditable based on migrations and land mass separations. Physical observable evidence such as DNA being alike in similar species and not as much alike in dissimilar species in PREDICTABLE percentages. Physical evidence like in bird beaks on the island, in the way bacteria EVOLVES.Evidence for resurrection is nil. A myth told and written down centuries later is not evidence. Resurrection is based in stories. Evolution is based on physical evidence and as more is found, it fits in into what has already been found in a predictable manner.(The responses to this post were predictable summaries of the psuedo-science creationist nonsense that abounds out there. It is amazing what people will let themselves beleive to preserve their myth systems.)

And Harvey, subtractive evolution works at a vastly different rate than additive evolution or varietal evolution where a feature is modified a bit by a mutation. You could read about why this is so if you wanted to, but no, humans are not likely to ever 'loose their legs' in space. They would use them to navigate around a weightless environment and for balance and such. You do not have a basic grasp the mechanics of evolution, so the kinds and rates cannot be explained to you.

You continue to make statements of things that you have not investigated. Regarding the evidence from the fossil record, I direct your attention to Donald Prothero's book Evolution: What the Fossils Say and Why It Matters. Prothero meticulously takes apart creationism and their (your's) misunderstanding and shows that the fossil record confirms evolution quite nicely.

The problem Harvey is that you, like your fellow creationists, will ignore the import of the evidence and will simply dismiss it and explain it away. Tell me Harvey, what type of evidence in the fossil record would convince you that evolution has occurred?

On the issue of credibility, remember Harvey you are the one who for example argued that the amount of moon dust favored young earth creationism. I called you on the carpet for using an argument that was discredited decades ago and even Answers in Genesis tells creationists to not use. But yet, there you were using the same refuted argument. Tell me who is more informed?

But Harv, you in fact demonstrate that you do NOT know the current information regarding the theory of evolution and its evidence. Remember man, many of us used to believe as you do, we know the arguments, we know the mentality. We are just trying to get you to be objective enough to actually read a couple of substantial books like Prothero and Coyne (and even Dawkins new book) but you continue to refuse.

What substantial works have been written by creationists lately that demonstrate the scientific evidence for creation or the problems with evolution? Go ahead and list them.

Where in the strata would "Creationist Theory" predict that we would find an animal with partial aquatic features and partial land animal features like Tiktaalik?

Where in the strata would "Creationist Theory" predict we would find fossilized Three-Toes Sloths? Would it predict sloths beneath the dinosaurs since they are (arguably) slower than even the slowest dinosaur and could not escape the flood waters?

Standard evolutionary theory has predictive power for these types of questions--"Creationism Theory" has none as far as I can tell . . .

Harvey, My Sweet,You said,You just mad because you believe in STUPIDITY too-LOL

No, Harvey, I not just mad, and I not believe in all-caps STUPIDITY. Evolutionary Theory has the status that it does precisely because it corresponds to the natural world and gives us broad explanatory and predictive power. What do you have?

Let's see. Oh, yeah. There are things like "Destroy Your Computer"(http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/09/destroy_your_computer_now.php) and "Rapture 2009"(http://home.flash.net/~evt/rapture.htm). The second one tells us that the rapture was certain to happen on 9/22/2009, but no one disappeared. Why not? Because religious claims are stupid and unreliable.

You said,Your whole belief system accounts for nothing but make believe when it comes to evolution...they you guys act as if noone knows current info but you...what atotal joke!

That's your defense? "Us poor Christians just can't understand"...

Actually, Harvey, evolutionary theory accounts for a great deal, and we do not think that no one knows current info but us, but we do know that you're not one who does.

It's not a total joke. In fact, evolutionary theory is helping to look out for your family, something your religion isn't capable of doing.

As far as Christians understanding evolutionary theory, Harvey, there are ones like you who are intentionally ignorant and who try to perpetuate their own ignorance, thus harming us all. There are those who are stellar scientists like Ken Miller, thus helping us all. And, there are those who are honestly ininformed about evolution. These are easy prey for persons like you who want them to fail to understand it.

You cannot defend your position because you yourself do not believe other denominations of Christianity or legitimate. If Christians were more science-like in their approach to their practice there would only be one form of practice. Unlike in science you need to have actually proof that your data is correct and have it verified by others in your field.

In Christianity anyone can start a church, create a Christ-like doctrine, develop a following, sell books, and earn a decent amount of money, based solely on their personality and speaking skills, and some knowledge of the bible.

Think of Todd Bentley as an example who claimed that people rose from the dead because of his on air sermons. Todd isn’t a scientist he doesn’t need to have the same standards of proof. He doesn’t need the same standards because the standard a Christian uses to determine divine intervention is considerable lower much lower then what you would find in science.

Example would be if you thought you had a specific illness the 1st doctor says you have it, but you are unsure of the diagnoses you would visit a 2nd opinion that is not related with the 1st doctor. Would you do the same thing with a priest? Would a Christian seek the advice of a different minister? Probable not.

District Supt. Harvey Burnett said... So that's how it's done now? Novices can't read critically and assess information with other available information?

Your main motivation to rebuke the theory of evolution has less to do with critically assess information. Your rejection of the theory of evolution has more to do with your specific Christian beliefs. Science unlike Theology is not based on a person’s opinion. Science is based on data that you can present and have peer reviewed. You can personally rebuke evolution all you want but until you do the grunt work of collecting of data, performing experiments, and writing papers, you opinion is, well your opinion and nothing more.

evangelico said...

Stupid goprairies - there is no evolution in bacteria becoming resistant but a mere adaptation to a ever growing harsh environment (for the bacteria) it adapts ! It does not become another species... still there is no evolution...

Adapt is also known as change, alter, modify, adjust, vary, revise, amend, bend, fit, and rework.

Evolution is also known development, fruition, growth, progress, and advancement.

You said:In Christianity anyone can start a church, create a Christ-like doctrine, develop a following, sell books, and earn a decent amount of money, based solely on their personality and speaking skills, and some knowledge of the bible.

Let's place this in the proper perspective...it should go like this:

In Christianity(Atheism) anyone can start a church (an idea), create a Christ-like doctrine (claim metaphysical naturalism), develop a following (develop and create a network of phony scientific evidences) , sell books, and earn a decent amount of money, based solely on their personality (hatred of God which they say doesn't exist) and speaking skills, and some knowledge of the bible (some skewed and twisted scientific knowledge and faulty logic).

I think the second set without any reference to Christianity, God or the Bible is MOST accurate.

You asked:Where in the strata would "Creationist Theory" predict that we would find an animal with partial aquatic features and partial land animal features like Tiktaalik?

I simply say that you mean to tell me that you think it is fathomable that an animal has both lings and gills, skin and feathers, eyes that are adapted bopth to land journey and stays at sea for longs periods of time and you somehow don't think that being is superior to us?

Well, I guess I can see how especially when that same animal would actually be unfunctional in the real world due to his diversity of being...i mean strip away the scientific terms for a minute and picture a double adapted animal such as you THINK has been found...How does that animal function? What is it's diet? Not fully fish, not fully flesh eating (I suppose) only plants???

You said:It's not a total joke. In fact, evolutionary theory is helping to look out for your family, something your religion isn't capable of doing.

OK, is that right...evolutionary theory ends this way: live a senseless life where there is nothing that means anything except current relationships that essentially have no value, suffer meaninglessly, die without meaning, and last but not least, rot in the grave...I guess leave your bones for future archaeological study...One good thing huh?

Man I bring HOPE, HELP, and PEACE to someone EVERDAY of my life...in many cases just me being there is what someone needs to carry on with MEANINGFUL tasks and events of their existence...That's what I do.

You asked:What substantial works have been written by creationists lately that demonstrate the scientific evidence for creation or the problems with evolution? Go ahead and list them.

Go to any bookstore and pick up Hanegraff, Johnson, Strobel, Behe, Dembski (sic), and a whole host of others and get a perspective...in fact look at this...EVOLUTION has been taught as you so proudly say for years and has "great scholarship" (laugh-laugh) behind it right? YET, Dawkins admits that only 60% of Americans don't believe in EVOLUTION...whay is that? In his case he believes that most American's are so dumb as that they don't know the difference and if we were "exposed" to his version of truth we'd all be evolutionists, but quite the opposite is true, the more the foolish talk about evolution the more ridiculous it becomes...all of this is entertainment value for me because NONE of you can ever get past FIRST CAUSE...not even mathematically can you get to the first living organism yet alone anything that resembles natural selection...secondly evolution can't even come close to explaining consciousness in any way...so NONE of what you say holds water...the record is CLEAR all living things were created...I say that they were created by God as he has revealed himself within scripture and what we find is totally sonsistent with what he has revealed and what we don't know I takelike you atheists do BY FAITH...because that's ALL anyof you USE...F A I T H in metaphysical naturalism...

DSHBYou bring myth, blind ignorance, and hope in something that doesn't exist. Some find foolish comfort in that. There may not be 'meaning' in the naive way that you think of it, but atheists take as much joy in family and friends and daily life as anyone, without ascribing any faky mythological meaning to it. instead of being grateful to a mythological being for whom there is no evidence, they are grateful to other people and they do things back for other people instead of useless praying. you waste time interacting with a diety that does not exist, making false promises to others about that nonexistant diety, and relying on that mythical diety when you should be interacting with people about real things. btw if god answers prayers and protects and heals, why do you need to sell insurance to people?

You need to GOPRAY...but in the meantime you said this silly rambling mess...instead of being grateful to a mythological being for whom there is no evidence, they are grateful to other people and they do things back for other people instead of useless praying.

Forst of all God is not mythological and there is all kinds of evidence for him such as what you see through biological science...there is no reason for you to be different than a piece of rock if not for God...ie: materialism does not require consciousness or any of the diffence between you and a stone or a piece of dirt...God is the only difference...If you don't belive so please explain the metaphysical necessity of consciousness...I'd like to hear it.

Then you said: "btw if god answers prayers and protects and heals, why do you need to sell insurance to people?

Because part of the promise of God is that we all will leave this world and "a good man leaveth an inheritance to his children's children" (Prov. 13:22) and you better watch out because YOUR wealth is laid up for ME to enjoy-LOL

In other words Christians have a deeper value of ALL things temporary and eternal...you're like a one legged stool...no balance.

Harvey Go to any bookstore and pick up Hanegraff, Johnson, Strobel, Behe, Dembski (sic), and a whole host of others and get a perspective

I read Johnson's "Darwin on Trial" back in the mid 90s soon after reading Michael Denton's "Evolution: A Theory in Crisis." It was then that I embraced what later became known as "intelligent design." I have read some of Moreland, Behe, Meyer, Dembski, Wells and a host of others. I have only read one of Hanegraaff's books and it wasn't on evolution, but I doubt that he would have anything better to argue. Strobel I haven't read but I do have several of his books in my library. So, Harvey, I do have perspective.

YET, Dawkins admits that only 60% of Americans don't believe in EVOLUTION...whay is that?

Harv, there is a simple reason why so many Americans (the case is the same for other countries) reject evolution - it's called IGNORANCE! Much of this ignorance comes from people like you, proclaiming from the pulpits - it's God or evolution. Evolution is inadequately taught in most public schools due to people like you who become activists against evolution and get into school boards and then try to force your creationist/id shit down the throats of children, or if that doesn't work, then try to water down the teachings of evolution in the science classes.

During all those years that I was a young earth creationist/intelligent design advocate, I was in ignorance of the evidence for evolution. I was so convinced that the Bible was true that I simply assumed that evolution was untrue and used the arguments from the creationist and ID "experts." This is the situation that you are in Harvey. You have not read anything of substance by an evolution, all of your arguments come from creationists and IDers. No objectivity on your part to at least learn what the other side says. That is so sad.

BTW, I'm not a young earther either neither a fundy...Im my opinion there is a LOT of time unaccounted for in the Genesis account...the use of "yom" and the time before Adam's sin and his days are highly questionable so far as the narrative is concerned...

Since you readily admit that evolution can stay in place with limited knowledge, I say the same about God...

I knew that you had written the number wrong, I gave you the benefit of the doubt that you simply mistyped it which is why I didn't repeat the number. No big deal, we all make little mistakes like that all the time.

So from what you said are you an ID'er?

Not anymore. Although there are some IDers who embrace evolution, Behe being one, their numbers are far and few between. Kenneth Miller exposed enough of the problems with ID that I eventually rejected it. Soon after I ended up rejecting Christianity completely after realizing the extreme problems with the bible's historicity and the issues of biblical criticism (all expounded by Enns and Sparks).

Harvey BTW, I'm not a young earther either neither a fundy...Im my opinion there is a LOT of time unaccounted for in the Genesis account...the use of "yom" and the time before Adam's sin and his days are highly questionable so far as the narrative is concerned...

Well, Harvey this is good to know, but I have seen you arguing for a young creation, when did you change? Also, I hope that I am not detecting a hint of the "gap theory" in your statements. That's a dead view only held by certain types of dispensationalists and Ruckmanites.

Since you readily admit that evolution can stay in place with limited knowledge, I say the same about God...

That's fine if you want to argue this way, but you must understand that "limited knowledge" does not equate to no knowledge nor does it mean that we cannot come up with good theories (the scientific understanding of theory, that is, or to use Dawkins word: theorum). Nor does it mean that simply because science cannot (yet) explain something due to this "limited knowledge" does not mean that "god" did it.

Russ said... "It saddens me that from the pulpit you denigrate and lie about precisely the same science that you, your fellow churchmen, as well as the rest of us, live on."

"For the rest of us, including the Christianities that accept the established science of evolutionary theory(that's most of them), it is a complete waste of human potential.

You pervert those people's minds to the point where they are less capable of understanding and interpreting the world around them when you pervert the science we all are completely dependent on to survive. Remember, Harvey, they can live without you, they cannot live in today's world without science, and understanding it would make their lives so much better."

Hi Russ.

Yes its both saddening and sickening as well.

Im becoming more and more of the opinion now these days that humans dont have plenty of time left to carry on just simply trying to discuss these things with the "people of the many god,s" on this planet by always trying to adhere to use of niceties when doing it.

Not sure, guess maybe that puts me in the catagory of being what some are calling "militant atheism" these days.Yet maybe a bit like you seem to be, i just see how much faith beliefs in this world can help make many people drag the chain and produce a type of ignorance that effects us all.

Folks can call me just "militant" if it makes them feel better,im sure not gonna bother to lose any sleep over names.But on this planet there is many things that seem to need to be dealt with pretty much A.S.A.P,and the ignorance of many faith believers with such a belief of a afterlife etc sure doesnt do much to help motivate certain folks who follow them to feel any great urgency of sorting many things out down here.

Their thoughts often seem to be (i) believe in god (MY) afterlife is sorted and thats all that matters,i suggest in a very nasty selfish kind of way.

So yes some folks will call me "militant",but personally i see it as really being much more about survival.

And to be honest im starting to feel many faithful folks dont deserve use of the benefits of science and the modern world etc,to be dished out to them so freely whenever it suits.

Maybe its time the great benefits of science and the modern world are now presented to hard arsed faith belevers like our dear Harv in much more evidential purposeful way.It may help spark a brain wave or two, maybe??.

For instance should any of these hard arsed faith believers find their daughters have been raped,and the pleasure of science and gene technology etc could actually become useful.

The cops in these cases could simply say, bless you my son! and praise the lord!.You (already) believe god/s have all the answers,so why the hell come ask anything of me?.Quick, go elswhere and simply fall on your knees.

Of course they would then bleat, windge and moan and blog on the net about being so horribly persecuted etc for awhile.

But i was thinking maybe it might help a few more understand a little more that (this world) is a lot like a boat we (all do) happen to share.

And maybe it might help a few more think a little more, about maybe how many others are actually already being persecuted and abused because of stupid religious beliefs that drag the chain in this world.

Russ said...."As far as Christians understanding evolutionary theory, Harvey, there are ones like you who are intentionally ignorant and who try to perpetuate their own ignorance, thus harming us all. There are those who are stellar scientists like Ken Miller, thus helping us all. And, there are those who are honestly ininformed about evolution. These are easy prey for persons like you who want them to fail to understand it."

Damm right Russ, and bloody dangerious it is too in my opinion.How much damage has been instigated and done to this planet driven by faith believers believing this planet is actaully so despensable as another life awaits them all afterward,do you suppose?.

Pascals wager of complete utter stupidity, anyone keen?...Shall we gamble with that that we know we actually do have,for that that we dont yet actually know much about for sure?.

Lets see there is Christianity Islam Hinduism Judaism Buddhism Cheondoism Cao Dai and so very many more to be indoctrinated or born into,but you better choose.Because its a very very educated type thought isnt it?, that our ignorance through lack of any real evidence being supplied in this world will very likely bring wrath and punishment from some god/s.Hell everyone deserve to be punished for that what is really so hard to understand!,common sense see.

Scientists try to learn more and sometimes later even change their mind admitting to being wrong,the fools they start from a point of not knowing and work towards trying to be able to say they maybe do understand a little more.Where as faith believers by use of old words/thoughts and stories of ancient men already damm know it all!.

Go figure!.

Our friendly Harv says...."OK, is that right...evolutionary theory ends this way: live a senseless life where there is nothing that means anything except current relationships that essentially have no value, suffer meaninglessly, die without meaning, and last but not least, rot in the grave"

Yes dear honest Harv, its such a senseless valueless life this one we mortals are all living.Man its so worthless if it wasnt for the possible wrath of the gods im quite sure everyone would be real keen and ready to quickly jump off the nearest bridge.

Hey next time you get sick Harv dont bother asking for those senseless meds.....Man one has to wonder why so many folks even spend time senselessly creating them all,hell wouldnt it be wonderful if our children had to suffer as much as possible in this world.

you said:Hey next time you get sick Harv dont bother asking for those senseless meds.....Man one has to wonder why so many folks even spend time senselessly creating them all,hell wouldnt it be wonderful if our children had to suffer as much as possible in this world.

The difference between us my friend is that I know that it was God who gave man whatever ability he has to discover science (which by the way existes since man was created)and create medicines or whatever man uses to help one another.

I also know that without God, man has a tendencey to take what are otherwise helpful scientific discoveries and distort them and use them for evil purposes. Atomic energy will light out homes and that's good, but it will also destroy nations and that's bad...

So the point of acknowledge is where we part, secondly many statemsents of evolution are bad simply because they are bad science, not because God said so...that's where you fail to understand my arguments because you believe I enter with a Christian presuppositional bias...I only have a Christian control belief and world view, but I am not hampered from looking at good evidence and evaluating it on best principles.

However, you don't offer the same courtesy. You becasue of metaphysical naturalism BEGIN with a presuppositional bias that NOTHING you see or find will lead you to or indicate a "footprint" of God. That's where I believe that you (representative of other MN'rs) lack.

So I god against evolution because primarily it's bad scinece....when I read comments like sampfire's, who says that "species" basically means nothing an that all animals are in some sort of quasi-cross DNA mix...that's scarry and IF that evolution, I can't see how any rational human being could fathom it.

Harvey,You said,OK, is that right...evolutionary theory ends this way: live a senseless life where there is nothing that means anything except current relationships that essentially have no value, suffer meaninglessly, die without meaning, and last but not least, rot in the grave...I guess leave your bones for future archaeological study...One good thing huh?

What you've said here is rather nonsensical. It makes no sense to use the construction "evolutionary theory ends this way." Then, you follow it up with nothing pertaining to evolutionary theory, but what I can only guess must be what you consider to be consequences of accepting the science of evolutionary theory.

When you make these doltishly unrelated associations do you mean to debase the lives of all those who label themselves "Christian," while also accepting evolutionary theory? Do you want to hurt Francis Collins? Do you hope to wound Kenneth Miller? Do you crave to eviscerate that small percentage of the National Academy of Science and the Royal Society who count themselves among the Christians? Do you wish to cut out the heart of each and every person who recognizes the fact that is evolutionary theory, even though they are denizens of some Christianity?

You seek to hurt and insult. You want to demean, debase and denigrate. You tear at people emotionally. You try to inflict pain and suffering. And, then, with your casual overbearing impudence, you exalt yourself, you arrogantly hold up Harvey Burnett as a shining moral paragon, by saying:Man I bring HOPE, HELP, and PEACE to someone EVERDAY of my life...in many cases just me being there is what someone needs to carry on with MEANINGFUL tasks and events of their existence...That's what I do.

You bring all-caps HOPE? You bring all-caps PEACE? I don't think so, Harvey. I see you as exemplifying the worst that religion has to offer. I truly think that from what you continually relate on various forums, including your own, about how you, and only you, actually know what constitutes real Bible-based Christianity, that the only thing that keeps you from massacring those who disagree with you - me and my family, others on this forum, Christians who have views differing from yours, essentially anyone who is not a Harvey Burnett Christian- is the secular protections our social system has in place. I'm convinced that you're among that religious ilk which, without enforcible secular protections, you'd be cutting throats, hanging, burning, torturing, and otherwise exterminating anyone who doesn't share your particular version of Christian delusion.

Your holy book demands such things, and it's clear that your personal willingness to vilify and dehumanize people knows no bounds. Here, you attack people over a scientific discipline you are obviously completely ignorant of. Unfortunately, your religiously induced malignancy of ignorance is irremedial. You can never admit to being wrong. You can never admit that you don't know. Trained experts, Christian or not, are wrong. You have abandoned the path to knowledge. By doing so, you have forever shackled yourself to ignorance, no doubt, for you, a self-satisfying and soothing ignorance. Your ignorance defines you, Harvey. Your mind is screwed up. You are no longer educable.

The danger you pose is even more apparent when we consider your paranoid stance toward evolutionary theory. Are people who accept the fact of evolution really out to get you, Harvey? Did the idea of evolution leap from minds possessed of demons intent on destroying Christianity? Most Christians accept the scientific fact of evolution, while harboring no paranoia about it. Why are you different? What's happened in your mind that you see a 150 year-long conspiracy against what you stand for? Inside your ignorance, you implicate poor Charles Darwin, when outside your ignorance the world knows that his ideas relate to today's evolutionary theory in about the same way that van Leeuwenhoek's discovery of bacteria relates to modern medicine. Important historically, but no longer of practical day-to-day use. But, conspiracy theorists need a common enemy, a tangible target for their unified hatred, so you pick an innocent long-dead man who just like the rest of us was trying to make sense of world.

You're presented two paths, Harvey: one path of study leading to knowledge and understanding, and another path of ignorant paranoia propped up with lies and distortions. The path of study is challenging and requires hard work, time, energy and intense effort to grasp how the pieces of the real world fit together. The other path asks nothing more of you than finding a few easily regurgitated lies about your object of paranoia, and keep retelling them. Lie, lie, lie and lie some more. If a lie is seen to have little affect, make up a better one. Along this indolent's path none of the pieces have to work together. None of those following this path need agree since they adhere to no standard.

Why does Harvey Burnett intentionally choose the lazy man's path of lying ignorant paranoia instead of the path to understanding valued by those not afraid of hard work? I suppose we'll never know.

Your failure to understand the world around you in a correct context, is underscored by your comment, Man I bring HOPE, HELP, and PEACE to someone EVERDAY of my life...in many cases just me being there is what someone needs to carry on with MEANINGFUL tasks and events of their existence...That's what I do.

You fail to see that none of what you say here is Christian-specific. These are human traits. All we humans do these things all over the world. As has been pointed out here many times, these intentional misreadings of the world are also not common to all Christians; they appear to be peculiar to those of the same ilk as Harvey Burnett, but they reach their vile peak with Harvey himself.